Are proghead nerds?

Saperlipopette! wrote: ^ I too can't help but think of the 1970's as a cultural golden era (I'll include th 1960's as well. People actually listen to-and bought quite challenging Jazz records - and watched works of art in cinema). There was actual artistic freedom even within the mainstream - at least to an extent. -and one can't blame the 1970's for country music. I don't really mind tobacco, disco (in fact I find it too easily dismissed and UNDRERRATED) or queerism either (or maybe I'm misunderstanding what queerism means).

Disco, AOR and yacht rock are dope. Also, New Hollywood was amazing and many great underrated directors such as Altman, Cassavetes or Lumet emerged from it.

Sean Trane wrote: omphaloskepsis wrote: All four men are alpha males. All four are married and still listen to prog. Surely there must be a certain trace of nerdism stuck in between those layers of muscle Gnik Nosmirc wrote: Sean Trane wrote: Absofùckinglutely. I'd never heard in North Am (Central Canada) of progressive rock in the 70's , even if the qualificative was sometimes used) and even less of "prog" (or "PROG"). And yes, we had teachers that enjoyed Crimson, Floyd & ELP. Certainly, back then, today's "PROG" pioneer-bands and their fans were not ostracized, especially if they enjoyed other type of rock. Trouble arose when punk started happening in 77, but by that time, it was the birth of all these chapels: the different camp were mostly hard rock (and heavy metal), Funk/Soul, Country/soft Rock (Yacht rock didn't exist back then), disco, AOR (the latter two were where most of the girls to be found) Upon return to western Europe in 91, when asked about my musical tastes in the Belgian-state owned TV/Radio where I found my first job (and where I made most of my friends & buddies, still today), most everyone understood "hard rock", when I spoke of "art rock", so when specifying the groups, some spoke of "progressive rock", but the term "PROG" wasn't coined yet. This IMHO came about in the mid-90's, when progheads/nerds/jerks/dorks started appearing and the scene was growing from non-existant to a secular & secretive gigs out in the boondocks. In some ways those nerds/dorks were very helpfull in creating that second (or third) golden age ( or wave), because it's mostly their devotion and labor that helped it grow. I love pretty much everything from the 70's (even punk) so I would have fit everywhere. Great times. let's not overdo things with rampant nostalgia either The 70's were troubles times (Nam, Cambodia, birth of modern terrorism, Petrol Crisis, etc...) and some awful habits abounded: that rampant heterosexuality , heavy use of tobacco everywhere , birth of disco (and queerism) , country music even   Le Séparatisme de La Belle Province killed partly the spirits and ruined an economy. So yeah, I enjoyed the 70's tremendously, but it wasn't a golden era. .

I meant musically, not politically.

Sean Trane wrote: Jacob Schoolcraft wrote: I started listening to Art Rock in 1970 and continued as such for years until people began referring to it as Progressive Rock. In the early 70s as a teenager...people were generally aware of ELP, Genesis and Yes. It was widely accepted...however as the years progressed ...the generation of teenagers began taking to mainstream Rock ...which wasn't necessarily commercially viable Rock.. Albums like Robin Trower Bridge Of Sighs and different bands playing a hard edge sounding Boogie started to attract a large audience of hard- core teenage rockers. Right around this time I crossed paths with people who disliked Progressive Rock and I was treated like a misfit or outcast...not necessarily a nerd though. Or perhaps in some people's vision the same. Several music teachers in high school admired ELP , Yes and Genesis Absofùckinglutely. I'd never heard in North Am (Central Canada) of progressive rock in the 70's , even if the qualificative was sometimes used) and even less of "prog" (or "PROG"). And yes, we had teachers that enjoyed Crimson, Floyd & ELP. Certainly, back then, today's "PROG" pioneer-bands and their fans were not ostracized, especially if they enjoyed other type of rock. Trouble arose when punk started happening in 77, but by that time, it was the birth of all these chapels: the different camp were mostly hard rock (and heavy metal), Funk/Soul, Country/soft Rock (Yacht rock didn't exist back then), disco, AOR (the latter two were where most of the girls to be found) Upon return to western Europe in 91, when asked about my musical tastes in the Belgian-state owned TV/Radio where I found my first job (and where I made most of my friends & buddies, still today), most everyone understood "hard rock", when I spoke of "art rock", so when specifying the groups, some spoke of "progressive rock", but the term "PROG" wasn't coined yet. This IMHO came about in the mid-90's, when progheads/nerds/jerks/dorks started appearing and the scene was growing from non-existant to a secular & secretive gigs out in the boondocks. In some ways those nerds/dorks were very helpfull in creating that second (or third) golden age ( or wave), because it's mostly their devotion and labor that helped it grow.

I love pretty much everything from the 70's (even punk) so I would have fit everywhere. Great times.

Back in the day, my brother and his friends were huge prog fans.
My brother was our high school's starting running back. He ran track and wrestled. He served four years in the marines and he became a professional firefighter.

His friend Steve was the starting quarterback. He was in the Air Force and a professional firefighter.

Wendel ran track and was the starting middle linebacker. He served in the Marines and he's a gynecologist.

Greg pitched for the baseball team and played point guard on the basketball team. He played college baseball. He owns a major car dealership.

This foursome loved Yes, ELP, King Crimson, Bowie, Queen, Rush, Pink Floyd, Jethro Tull, Styx, and Kansas. They saw all these bands live. All four men are alpha males. All four are married and still listen to prog.

However, they didn't listen to Gentile Giant, VDGG, or Genesis.


Edited by omphaloskepsis - Yesterday at 04:39

I started listening to Art Rock in 1970 and continued as such for years until people began referring to it as Progressive Rock.
In the early 70s as a teenager...people were generally aware of ELP, Genesis and Yes. It was widely accepted...however as the years progressed ...the generation of teenagers began taking to mainstream Rock ...which wasn't necessarily commercially viable Rock.. Albums like Robin Trower Bridge Of Sighs and different bands playing a hard edge sounding Boogie started to attract a large audience of hard- core teenage rockers. Right around this time I crossed paths with people who disliked Progressive Rock and I was treated like a misfit or outcast...not necessarily a nerd though. Or perhaps in some people's vision the same.

Several music teachers in high school admired ELP , Yes and Genesis though musicians in orchestras often criticized it and found it laughable or disgraceful to Classical Music. It was a mixed bag reaction ..particularly with snobs.. however they were outnumbered when teenagers who had been classically trained on piano began buying Mellotron and Synthesizer to form cover bands and play Battle Of The Bands or High School Dance. Either way...what Emerson once stated about smiling in a band photo or album cover. It didn't work....and the audience were just as serious as the musicians. No one was particularly interested in smiling ...or selling out...If someone in high school heard about your band having a Mellotron or Synthesizer they'd show up just to see it. That's ancient fossil and as time progressed people generally expected bands to use either one in a Pop song..for example...but in the early 70s it was a new interest. Even though The Moody Blues had used a Mellotron in the late 60's people still treated it as something new. Something exciting for people to enjoy. In 71' people were still retracing King Crimson's steps and Mellotron was very much a new idea to them. Even though The Rolling Stones used it in "2000 Light Years From Home" in 67' ...the Progressive Rock composition of YES featured it on Fragile and people went crazy and gave new birth to it. It wasn't until the late 70s I noticed rockers trying to outcast progress. Especially if you had an interest in Gong, Hatfield and the North, Camel or Pulsar. You were toxic

Edited by Jacob Schoolcraft - June 01 2025 at 17:02

^In principle, I don't really mind anything so called "retro" at all. I tend to think that it's overtly critizised and often unfairly dismissed, and many do so simply by default. If a band (or someone) comes across as honest at doing what they do out of love, manage to reattach themself to a part of history that I have an affinity or longing for (just like them. I suppose), and are good at it - I'm not complaining. The essential part of any art or artist to me, isn't so much that they create something "new". Originality is of less importance to me than idiosyncrasy. That last part, while difficult to state what it exactly is - I know it's something I look for in the arts. I think I can hear-or see it when it's there, and when it's missing. Plain copycats with nothing genuine to express, obviously don't have "it".

Originality and "the new" is vital when history is written, and of course there's a reason why Miles and Beethoven are historically more important figures than those who followed in their footsteps. But is it really optimal for the experiencer of the arts to approach all works with a mindset like that? I don't think so.

Edited by Saperlipopette! - June 01 2025 at 15:02

Gnik Nosmirc wrote: What bands do symph weenies worship? I'm interested in what you call "symph weenies". I personally enjoy retro prog, much more than neo-prog. I just think it's not very innovative. But it sounds great. Is it as revolutionary as Kid A or Soundtracks for the Blind though? Absolutely not.

I also enjoy most retro-prog (as all symph weenies do as well) and yes, it's not innovative or inventive, but something in them was grabbing me by the tripes. The limit between neo & retro is fuzzy and difficult (IMHO) to draw the line & justify, but most of us know retro when we hear it.

One of the albums that drew me gradually back into the rock realm (which I'd +/- fled since 85) was Lenny Kravitz's Let Love Rule, which was voluntarily made in the 70's manner. (other albums that brought me back to "rock" were RHCP's SBSM or Neil Young's Ragged Glory). Maybe, my crossing back the pond to Europe played a role, but when I left Canada (first Mtl, then Tor if you care to know) really disinterested by anything rock, and music was playing less impiortant a role for me, despite foraying in 60/70's jazz. Discovering Anglagard, Anekdoten, Tangle Edge, Per Lindh Project and Landberk, that really gave me a real boost (energy-wise) that none of those soporific neo bands managed to do.

==============

Neo-prog was symph-weenie rock that started in the early 80's with IQ, Marillion, in the UK, that wave in Japan (Bio Ky Ran shouldn't be included in "neo", though), then in the 90's, the Polish wave (Collage, Lizard, Abraxas, etc), quite a few Italians (Asgard, Nuova Idea , A Piedi Nudi, anything that Fabio Zuffanti ever participated in, Germinale, etc...), the Scandinavian tribes (Galleon, Gazpacho, TFK & stuff). Of course they spread like the plague all over the planet (even in Ozzie-land with Aragon).The US neo-prog (Magna Carta label, Spock Beard, etc...) was a bit different musically, because less symphonic

I saw many of those bands on stage, and all too often came home very disappointed, though I was clearly in a minority in the attendance. The mood installed by the crowd was like as if you were in a mass from some obscure sect that didn't really want to spread more (which was not the case), and the least comment or yawn wasn't tolerated.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like neo-prog, but admire their tenacity in whatever they did for so little rewards (outside the unconditional adoration they got from the weenies).

So more than the bands themselves, I've got more snarks towards their rabid fans.

Sean Trane wrote: Gnik Nosmirc wrote: Sean Trane wrote: Dorks are definitely a nasty form of nerds, precisely because they go out of their way to be dorks. Nerds are +/- their own victims and can't help themselves being losers. I don't really care about them. I just get the sense that they label you that way because they want you to be like them—just because you might share some of the same tastes. Then they act like they own those tastes, as if they're the gatekeepers. Likewise, they have this awful tendency to homogenize everything under the banner of geek consumerism. Being interested in mythology, history, and philosophy makes you, in their eyes, a fan of board games and a cringe-worthy collector of figurines (even though there's nothing fundamentally wrong with being into that). That's where I draw the line between what is essentially an intellectual and a nerd/dork. by boardgames, I supose you mean the Dungeons & Dragons stuff, as opposed to Cribbage or Monopoly. I actually like some of these latest generation of BG, but f**k these people are so geekish that there almost dorks (but harmless ones) https://boardgamegeek.com/ in some ways , they're scarier than the symph weenies of the 90's.

I actually enjoy board games, just more in the vein of Monopoly than D&D though.

What bands do symph weenies worship? I'm interested in what you call "symph weenies".

I personally enjoy retro prog, much more than neo-prog. I just think it's not very innovative. But it sounds great. Is it as revolutionary as Kid A or Soundtracks for the Blind though? Absolutely not.

Edited by Gnik Nosmirc - May 30 2025 at 17:28

Gnik Nosmirc wrote: Sean Trane wrote: Dorks are definitely a nasty form of nerds, precisely because they go out of their way to be dorks. Nerds are +/- their own victims and can't help themselves being losers. I don't really care about them. I just get the sense that they label you that way because they want you to be like them—just because you might share some of the same tastes. Then they act like they own those tastes, as if they're the gatekeepers. Likewise, they have this awful tendency to homogenize everything under the banner of geek consumerism. Being interested in mythology, history, and philosophy makes you, in their eyes, a fan of board games and a cringe-worthy collector of figurines (even though there's nothing fundamentally wrong with being into that). That's where I draw the line between what is essentially an intellectual and a nerd/dork.

by boardgames, I supose you mean the Dungeons & Dragons stuff, as opposed to Cribbage or Monopoly.

I actually like some of these latest generation of BG, but f**k these people are so geekish that there almost dorks (but harmless ones)

https://boardgamegeek.com/

in some ways , they're scarier than the symph weenies of the 90's.

Edited by Sean Trane - May 30 2025 at 02:28

Gnik Nosmirc wrote: The reason I brought this up stems from stumbling upon a subreddit where nearly every post came from self-proclaimed “proud dorks” who spoke in a rigid, almost dogmatic way about what prog is — as if there’s one definitive version of it — and insisted that being into prog automatically makes you a massive nerd, no exceptions. .... Which is why I’ve made a point of keeping my musical taste diverse — from the funk and soul of Earth, Wind & Fire, to the Nordic psychedelia of Tusmørke, all the way to the experimental alt-rock of Radiohead. ..... Over time, my musical tastes have become increasingly eclectic. My library is a mix of progressive rock, fusion subgenres, and a solid foundation of classic jazz. I’ve come to see prog as a natural extension of blues and jazz — branching into classical, folk, electronic, and beyond. For me, it felt like the next logical step after diving deep into jazz and fusion. That progression is clearly reflected in my collection, much of which comes from albums listed on ProgArchives and JazzMusicArchives.

Dorks are definitely a nasty form of nerds, precisely because they go out of their way to be dorks. Nerds are +/- their own victims and can't help themselves being losers. Then again, you've got the rare Prog Jerk (there is one on this forum)

I've never made a point of widening my musical tastes. It happened right from the start and increased as time went on.

TBH, I'm not a big fan of what is called "classic jazz", because it encopasses too many styles I don't really care for. Not just the different Bops, Cool, Swing, Big Band, Soft (the worst kind), Acid, etc.... What I really like is the Modal jazz "new thing" from the Impulse! label (Coltrane, Mingus) and what ensued in the 70's (Tyner, Alice, Pharoah, etc...), Mwandishi, RTF, WR, MO etc... I'm also into the LDN scene that calls itself "spiritual jazz" and other stuff.


.

Edited by Sean Trane - May 30 2025 at 02:48